Health determinants in Canadian northern environmental impact assessment

Abstract

The need to address the human health implications of northern development is well founded, and the role of health determinants in environmental impact assessment is increasingly recognised; however, there is limited understanding of the nature of health determinants and current practices in northern project assessment and decision making. This paper reports on a study of the nature and use of health determinants in Canadian northern environmental impact assessment, and discusses the key challenges to, and opportunities for, improved practice. Four themes emerged from this study. First, the consideration of health is limited to physical environments and the physical determinants of health, with limited attention to broader social and cultural health determinants. Second, when health is considered in northern project impact assessments such considerations rarely carry forward to post-project approval monitoring of health determinants and evaluation of health impact management programmes. Third, while there is general consensus that health determinants should be an integral part of northern impact assessment, there exist different expectations of the role of health determinants in project evaluation and decision making due in large part to different understandings and interpretations of health. Finally, a broader conceptualisation of health and health determinants in northern environmental impact assessment is required; one that takes into consideration northern cultures and knowledge systems, and is adaptive to local context, geography and life cycles.

Integration of health into urban spatial planning through impact assessment: Identifying governance and policy barriers and facilitators

“…Several studies note that an overly narrow definition of health is a major barrier to the better integration of health into the spatial planning system (Ahmad et al, 2008;Bekker et al, 2005;Bronson and Noble, 2006;Corburn and Bhatia, 2007;Fischer et al, 2010;Noble and Bronson, 2005;PAS, 2008b). Appraisals of planning proposals tended to focus on physical and environmental health concerns, such as air, water and noise issues, rather than on the broader social and cultural determinants of health (Fischer et al, 2010;Noble and Bronson, 2005).…”

“…This limits the ability of the assessment to influence planning decisions (Bekker et al, 2005;Bendel and Owen-Smith, 2005;Bronson and Noble, 2006;Burns and Bond, 2008;Fischer et al, 2010;Mathias and Harris-Roxas, 2009;Mwalyosi and Hughes, 1998;Bronson, 2005, 2006). A particular concern is how to "fit" a non statutory assessment (HIA) into a statutory planning framework.…”

“…Inadequate assessment processes remain a key obstacle (Bekker et al, 2005;Blau and Mahoney, 2005;BMI, 1998;Bronson and Noble, 2006;Davenport et al, 2006;Harris et al, 2009;Kørnøv, 2007;NHS London, 2008;Wismar et al, 2007;YHEC, 2006). As far as HIA is concerned, authors refer to its narrow focus, over emphasis on negative environmental health impacts rather than positive benefits on social infrastructures (Bekker et al 2005;Bronson and Noble, 2006) or health equality (Blau and Mahoney, 2005), and process too demanding or voluminous for policy makers (Wismar et al, 2007).…”

“…As far as HIA is concerned, authors refer to its narrow focus, over emphasis on negative environmental health impacts rather than positive benefits on social infrastructures (Bekker et al 2005;Bronson and Noble, 2006) or health equality (Blau and Mahoney, 2005), and process too demanding or voluminous for policy makers (Wismar et al, 2007). SEA does not necessarily report on health impacts in a satisfactory way either.…”

“…The quality and range of the evidence base used in the appraisals to evaluate the health impacts of spatial planning is identified as a barrier, along with a lack of robustness and relevance to local context (Bekker et al, 2005;Bhatia and Wernham, 2008;BMI, 1998;Bronson and Noble, 2006;Burns and Bond, 2008;Corburn and Bhatia, 2007;Dannenberg et al, 2008;Neville et al, 2009;Noble and Bronson, 2005;PAS, 2008b;Wismar et al, 2007). There is a lack of guidance on how to prioritise sources of evidence and methods for analysis of health effects (Bhatia and Wernham, 2008;Neville et al, 2009).…”